tv The Young Turks With Cenk Uygur Current March 1, 2012 4:00pm-5:00pm PST
>> welcome to the young turks. andrew breitbart has passed away. we're going to look into his legacy for better or for worse. >> animals, you're freaks and animals. >> two very different perspectives today. we will have the former head of acorn to talk about andrew breitbart, but also one of his top deputies will be on the show to talk about his legacy, so both sides. >> remember how we had sandra fluke on the show? here's what rush limbaugh said about her. >> she's a slut. she wants to be paid about sex.
>> i can't wait to rip into rush on that. he said even things that are worse than that. we'll show you that later in the program, and also has president obama lost his mojo with young voters. >> i don't have any feelings about him, really, i don't know. >> we talk about why he might have lost those young voters later in the program, as well. it's go time. >> there is no corporate control here, independent programming. >> all right, welcome to the young turks. this morning, as i was reading the news it popped up on twitter and everywhere else that andrew breitbart passed away. he's been on this show. my initial reaction was that i felt sick about it. he was here just a couple of weeks ago and we shook hands several times.
we talked. i know he's got four kids and wife. the thought of them going without a father just made me so sad. that he's 43 years old. i felt on a personal level private level, i felt terrible about it. now, at the same time, we have an obligation here to talk about what he did publicly. just because, you know, we saw the guy and feel terribly for his family doesn't mean that we shouldn't be honest about what legacy he left behind here. first of all, here's someone who i know didn't mind talking about people who had passed away, andrew breitbart. after ted kennedy had passed away, andrew wrote a number of skatinging tweets calling senator kennedy: >> we left out some of the worst ones. so why did he do that? he explained in another tweet.
he said: >> so, now, we will not apply that same standard to andrew breitbart. we are not going to talk about how he was as a human being personally, et cetera. no matter how much you dislike someone in politics, you don't know how they are with their family you. to have keep that in mind. i'm sure he was a terrific father and husband and i'm sure they're going to deeply miss him as we would all miss our you know loved one. so, on the other hand, when you talk about andrew breitbart and his public persona my problem with what he did was he treated it like a game and it wasn't a game. in some things, he was absolutely right. when you talk about for example anthony wiener, he got that one right and i was wrong on that one. i couldn't believe that congressman wiener would send
out those pictures on twitter and he turned out he had. he was a congressman. that's totally fair game, so breitbart went after him, got him on that. no problem. ok? but the problem, one of the problems is that andrew never admitted mistakes. when i say i got that one wrong it's because it's not a game to me. if it was a game, never admit mistakes, bull doze forward, i'm always right, i'm always right but that's the least of it that i thought it was perfectly fair game when he did with wiener. when you get to shirley sherrod he made it seem as if she was a racist and that applied to how she worked at the federal government. she was fired. it's not his fault. i blamed the obama administration more. it was their decision to fire her because they were so scared of breitbart and glenn beck and what they were going to say which i find really, really sad. it is his responsibility that he put that stuff out there. when i asked him to apologize here, he said there was no way
he would apologize. the fact that he got fired appeared to be immaterial to him. that was a callous disregard for people's lives in that one instance. you can say she's a government official, not a politician, a government official, so perhaps fair game. how about acorn? that really bothers me, because it's not -- you know what, before we get a acorn i want to give you a sense of how andrew thought it was a game. he was on the show to talk about how he had gone after the occupy movement, they were in d.c. at the time. you remember he shouted this at them. >> behave yourselves! behave yourself! uretericking animals. you are freaks and animals! >> basically yourself! stop raping people! stop raping people!
stop raping people! stop raping people! stop raping the people! you freaks! you filthy freaks! >> so, when andrew bite breitbart was on this show i asked him do you recall believe these people were rapists? he basically admitted, he totally admitteds it was in fun watch. >> because of the mainstream media will not report on the rapes because it's trying to protect it, this is a stunt in order to go over the mainstream media, to go over -- wait, this is a stunt in order to go over the mainstream media to get people talking about the rapes. >> but you see, i don't think you should play stunts when you're talking about people's lives. it turned one of the women there had been raped. easy calling these people rapists when some of the victims of that. breitbart was all one big game, who was fired, who was raped
who wasn't, who cares. he was winning the game. acorn was considered his biggest victory, but that's the problem. acorn didn't do it. when you look at four different organizations, including three different prosecutors looked at the acorn tapes and they all came to the same conclusion, heavily doctored. james o'keefe comes in, when you see the whole tape it turns out he didn't go into the offices in a pump costume. the audio and video doesn't match. was that explained by andrew breitbart as he put those videos forward? no, because there was a political game to be one. what happened? acorn got its funding pulled by the federal government. did anybody ask what is actual mission and objective? they served 400,000 member families across the country,
registered 25% of all voter at the their height according to their files. they helped raise the minimum wage, and they counseled 250,000 people to avoid predatory and sub prime loans. so, poor people were having trouble. they need help, right? they don't have the fancy lawyers, and maybe they're getting foreclosed on wrongly. who was there to help them? acorn. are they there anymore? no, the big bangs can do what they want. if they're employer was treating them like garbage who was there to help? acorn. but they're gone. why? because andrew breitbart wanted to play a game. it affects people's lives and affected them deeply. that is part of andrew breitbart's legacy. as bad as i feel for his family, we've got to keep that in mind,
too. as i watch the rest of television treat breitbart like he was a conquering hero, that is not the whole truth of the matter. i want to bring in better that lewis, a former c.e.o. of acorn and now the founder of the black institute. better that, thank you so much for joining us. i want to ask you. >> thank you. >> first lets start with what acorn was before andrew breitbart got to it. what did you all do? >> well, it was the largest community organization in the country. owe organized low and moderate income families. we organized folks around bread and butter issues, better housing, better neighborhoods better schools better wages and just fair treatment so that people that were low and moderate income folks, most of these people were black and brown could actually have a voice and have some power and some say in this country, and
have some say over their lives. >> and what happened once breitbart put out the video from o'keefe on acorn? what ensued that led to the demise of acorn. >> we were sort of like the cannery in the mine. they built a template on how they would attack other folks going forward, shirley sherrod planned parenthood anyone that had power talking about issues that the right wing conservatives didn't care for. the first thing is you put out a lie and you repeat it and repeat it through all of your sources whether it's rush limbaugh or fox news and andrew breitbart actually launched himself into right wing stardom by using these false tapes done by his
cohort, james o'keefe. he launched big government dot com with that acorn video and just repeat it and repeat i had and repeated it. he raised a lot of money off of acorn. believe me, every time breitbart uttered acorn's name he raised millions of dollars, and so he actually affected millions of lives and he knew it. he knew it was a lie. he knew what he was saying was not true, and he did it for ideal logical reasons and political game. i feel for his family. i just lost a loved one but what you do does reflect into your private life. even though he's gone off of the stage, he really, really
destroyed an organization that had a great impact on this country and did a lot of good and he did it with a lie. >> bertha, real quick, give me a sense of what happened to the people who worked at acorn and what happened to the community you used to serve. what's their situation today? >> well, i'm still here. you see me sitting before you created the organization called the black institute. poor people haven't gone away. former acorn members haven't gone away. people are still working in their neighborhoods, going after the issues that mean things to them. there's still bad housing, low wages, there's still unhealthy neighborhoods, so folks said you know what, we were here for 40 years, and we're not going to give up on the issues that mean things to us, so you have a lot of organizations and state organizations that really learned from the attacks on
acorn and it's made a lot of people stronger. it's also made folks who are progressive and who are liberal to say never again will we ever abandon an organization simply because of the right wing echo chamber. it's taught all of us across the country a great lesson, and it's strengthened a lot of grassroots and community organizations that are still fighting back. i know i am. >> all right one last really quick thing. i want to show you representative louie gomez of texas was doing a speech on behalf of breitbart and said acorn was doing -- had brought in underage girls, placed them in bondage and sexual prostitution and he compared andrew breitbart to some interesting people in american history. let's watch. >> this nation and dedom has lost a great pro opponent and
defender. thank you dear god for the gift of andrew breitbart. will have inspired so many who will pick up that banner and potentially as was the case with john quincy adams and abraham lincoln do far more than adams himself could have done. >> he over and over again compared john quincy adams' fight against slavey with what breitbart has done. >> it's a disgrace. andrew breitbart's name should not be uttered in the same sentences as with those two men. you see what's going on here. on the right, it doesn't matter what the truth is. it doesn't matter. they have decided to demonize the acorn organization, and they
practically say don't bother me with the facts. my mind is made up. here in america, out in the public square of ideas at least you can disagree. you don't have to be disagreeable, but make your case with the facts and stop, stop demonizing folks based on lies. it's a disgrace what andrew did. he never apologized for putting out these false tapes. but again, this is the new realm that we have to fight in and that's why folks who fought through these wars and the members of acorn are still fighting and we are going to continue to fight every lie every day. >> all right, better that lewis, former c.e.o. of acorn. thank you for joining us. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> joe polak he had lower in chief of breitbart.com will join
us and give us his side of the story. we'll be right back. brought to you by thermacare heat wraps. it's the only wrap with patented heat cells for up to 16 hours of back pain relief. can your patch say that? thermacare works differently. it's the only wrap with patented heat cells that penetrate deep to relax, soothe and unlock tight muscles for up to 16 hours of relief. that's 8 hours while you wear it, plus an additional 8 hours of relief after you take it off. can your patch, wrap cream or rub say that? so if you've got pain... get up to 16 hours of pain relief with thermacare. so, you guys grew up together. yes, since third grade... what are you lookin' at? not looking at i anything... we're not good enough for you. must be supermodels? what do you model gloves? brad, eat a snickers. why? 'cause you get a little angry when you're hungry. better? [ male announcer ] you're not you when you're hungry™. better. [ male announcer ] snickers satisfies.
>> we're back on the young turks. now, last time when we talked about andrew breitbart who unfortunately passed away just yesterday, and wanted to bring in somebody from his own website to be fair and give that perspective. joe polak was very close to andrew breitbart, grew up in chicago, graduated from harvard and was a nominee for congress in illinois. thank you for joining us. you saw the last segment we did. i want to let you respond. >> acopper and the acorn tapes obviously is a big part of andrew breitbart's legacy and exposing acorn and their role in terms of illegal activities they were ready and willing to do on tape and better that lewis may try to rewrite history but that's how it was. andrew would have loved to ask her if she had visited the white house, one of andrew's big stories he chased for several years was the white house guest list, which was supposed to be
transparent, but independent reports including "the new york times" found out that there were all these loopholes and so on and bertha lewis was one of the nails on the list. andrew would have loved just for the fun of it to ask if she visited the obama white house. we'll have to wait for another show for that. >> were you not aswaged by the four different investigations of acorn? you know, the california former attorney general jerry brown and there was one in new york and a congressional one that was non-partisan, they all seemed to exonerate acorn. did you look at that and go i wonder if they're on to something here? >> we sure did. it's always good to appoint internal friends of acorn to investigate acorn. it's an old trick. jerry brown investigating acorn is not convincing. scott harshbarger is not convincing.
acorn was convicted in voter fraud and other criminal activities across the united states. this was a bye partisan vote when democratic controlled both houses of congress to strip acorn of federal funding. that's a chapter that's been written and those are the facts. >> all right. i got to -- i just got to say you're 100% right that it was bipartisan for which i have great disdain of the democrats for doing that. republicans were doing that they had to do. implicated in voter fraud, but you guys implicated them and of course we get back into that debate. i want to talk about what's going to happen in the future. there's all these websites, including breitbart.com where you are editor in chief. what happens with those moving forward? >> we are moving forward. andrew was working very hard on the next phase of what he hoped the sites would become. we're rolling it out very soon. next week, you'll see the new breitbart.com.
andrew was proud of it, working very hard on it right up until the last hours before he died. we're going to continue his legacy and build on it. it's not going to be a memorial to andrew, it's going to be a living legacy of andrew, every new citizen journalist that he brings up to the ranks. one of the things he admires about you, is your grounding in history and having support and i know you didn't agree on just about anything, that was something that was talked about where people said look at what the young turks do, how they've evolved and what we can learn from them and build that into the world of citizen journalism that andrew breitbart wanted to create. >> i appreciate you saying that. who is going to run the sites and if you can, people are wondering, who owns the sights, so how does that go forward and get resolved? >> it's going to run as before, separate editors on each of the bigs. we have contributors, people who work across them. we have a growing organization
and andrew was very, very important seeking out new voices to bring in as contributors and carrying the stories forward and moving them forward. we'll have to take the lessons he taught us while he was with us and carry forward and do exactly what he would have done, but it's business at usual as breitbart.com. >> ok, and any idea, i mean, he was 43 years old so of course everybody is asking jeez why did this happen. any idea why this might have happened? >> i can't say anymore than i know. i know it was sudden, it was a shock. andrew had been talking to people and hanging out with people and emailing me and talking just as normally. we were working hard. he was in l.a. and on his way home and this happened. it was a shock to all of us and more than that i really just don't know. >> they say natural causes, but at the age of 43, you don't just die of natural causes, any sense of a heart attack or stroke? do we not know? >> i can't speculate. i went to law school, not medical school. >> that's very fair.
any thoughts on all these crazy conspiracy theories popping up now on the left and the right you know, on the left, you know, talks of how did he look, was he sick, was it drugs, whatever, on the right, obama had him killed et cetera. any comments on all of those. >> i thought you were going to ask me for the birth certificate. >> no, no, no, i don't believe a word of anything. >> andrew might have looked at that as an example of what's wrong with our media where people don't believe the mainstream media and they don't believe the simple straight forward story when it's given to them so they look for conspiracies because they know what's often packaged in the mainstream media are faults and underlying bias. andrew was never an enemy of current t.v. or msnbc even though he argued politically. they put their biases on the
table. at breitbart.com he resented the mainstream that hided the bias on the venire of objectivity. >> other than thank you for coming in, i can't -- you any him personally, so i can't express enough my condolences to you. i know if it was somebody i worked with every day, god, it would be devastating. >> you had a chance to debate him. he had fun with that. he's combative but playful. andy was kind to the people who knew him best. he had a lot more friends on the left than people realize and his loss really hurts everybody. >> thanks so much for joining us on the young turks. of course, he is the editor in chief of breitbart.com which will go on. >> when we return, we're going to bring on rick pearlstein and
the newest voice in cable news is on the new news network. >>it is an independent progressive voice and i love that. >>jennifer granholm joins current tv. a former two term governor. >>people like somebody who's got a spine. >>determined to find solutions... >>we need government to ensure that people have freedom. >>driven to find the truth... >>what's really going on? >>fearless, independent and above all, politically direct.
>> olbermann baby don't you want to go." >> "same old place." >> "sweet home chicago." >> are you caking credit for lin-sanity? >> i can't take credit for it, but i'm saying i was there early. >> that was president obama with bill simmons. when you look at that, those tapes, that looks cool man, and it's not an accident. they are trying to reach out to young voters again. you don't say oops, i ended up on bill simmons podcast. that's a normal part of politics trying to reach those voters. the reason he feels he has to reach them is there's some chance he lost them. take a look at an abc news report where they ask about enthusiasm for president obama among young voters. >> i don't have any feelings about him, really, i don't know.
>> i guess he's doing a good job. >> i'm not as enthusiastic as i was before. >> unfortunately, i'm not even registered to vote. >> they're not alone. in fact, rick brought up this great point about voter party i.d. so in 2008, when asked 60% of you say that they were identified themselves as democrats. 32% as republicans. look at 2012 now. it's only 47% and 43%. i think that's a devastating graph. i'm sure president obama is perfectly aware of those numbers and trying to get those people back. rick wrote some things i agree with. first he said: >> you know, when i read that, i was taken aback a little bit.
i thought that's right. so many of these kids grew up when the democrats have never acted courageously. why would they believe that these people would fight for social justice? you might think that's true strong, but a lot of people don't. a piece said he was a grand chess player and part of a strategy and president obama gives in to republicans so he can win later. he said: >> to me, this has been one of the to be problems with the obama administration. they won't plant their flag and say this is what we stand for. now again referring to andrew's piece:
>> that's a very interesting charge, one that i'm likely to agree with. we brought on rick perlstein. he is author of nixonland and his recent role, writing articles i just quoted. also he wrote about how obama needs to change. rick, great to have you on. i want to ask you about that last quote there. why do you think president obama might be embedding the republicans here. >> i mean if obamaism is a strategy where you say the guys from the other side believe this, and i'm going to reach out to them in the spirit of living kindness and fellowship and maybe we can come together, the problem is if that's always what he's going to do, the republicans can just say we can put out a position out there that's so extreme we know he's
going to ratify it by saying that its a reasonable negotiating position and every time they do that, they move the center a little more to the right. we saw it textbook, textbook perfection with this contraception fight where literally, history changed in the last month or so, a month ago, if you told someone that they were going to be debating the legitimacy of contraception on the front page of the new york times they would have said you're crazy. today, it's just part of the argument. it's a "controversy." the interesting thing is it's always the republicans who start these controversies that departments have to respond to. big power democrats in the obama administration never start a controversy that the republicans have to respond to. >> republicans look incredibly unreasonable.
they've probably lost a lot of women voters. it's a big political win for president obama. >> look at it this way a lot of people point out that 98% 99% ever women have used contraception who have been sexually active, right? the numbers are on our sides so when the republicans criticize contraception they're going against the majority. when you look at the charts on how many americans support legal abortion, that's been pretty much the same for 35 years, so the republicans, every time they restrict abortion rights are clearly going against public opinion. in the last year, this have been twice as many statewide abortion restrictions. that's because the very frame with which these issues get argued within the media and judiciary are set by the terms of the debate. they're shifting the terms of the debate. >> so, let me ask you.
>> people get their -- yeah. >> so look, the politics, i'm not sure about. it might be smart politics, you push the republicans so far right they don't have a chance of winning. whit comes to policy, i agree with you. i think it does great damage right? >> chenk, it's really interesting, because i've been reading pundits saying that the conservatives going so far to the right they're going to lose all their veers, like reading a historical documents since 1966. it never seems to happen. >> i hear you on that. part of the reason is because we're not having a fair battle because so much of who wins elections is decided by who has more money and does more advertising. that skews completely. the list goes on and on, the war on drugs and i can go on all night on all the things president obama has given in to
the republicans on so that they can't criticize him. my question to you is do you have a sense of whether president obama recognizes hey you know what, it is what it is, i got to win this political batting, and i'm going to give them all this ground on policy to do it, or if he genuinely thinks like what? i gave in on policy grounds? no, i'm a wonderful liberal progressive. does anybody know which of those two things he thinks is the reality? >> well, i think that the reality is that he believes that this kind of reconciliation is possible. even before he ran for president, he was talking about a grand bargain on entitlements, about a national need for sacrifice. that really seems to be where the rubber meets the road with this guy. you know recently, we've been talking about his populace turn and how he's getting it that the republicans are not interested in negotiating with him like it was the first month of his
presidency where they had to retreat and screamed patton when patton said we're going to go through them like crab through a goose. he bargained with them on the corporate tax which he wants to lower from 35% to 28%. >> one final possibility is that he's not progressive he's battling with himself, agreeing with himself. >> look, i don't care if he's progressive or conservative or a ham sandwich, i care about the values that i'm trying to advance as an activist and engaged intellectual. the fact of the matter is this is not good for the democratic party as an institution because every time he makes compromises you get another group of people saying i don't know who the democrats are. you had which exit poll in 2004 where people said i voted with george bush, i don't agree with what he says, but he is sincere
in saying it. every time the democrats negotiate with themselves, they might be helping themselves win the next election which is right around the corner, but eating the seed corn that it takes to build the brand to collapse for a generation for more. >> i'm afraid that's 100% right. we'll see what happens in the election, of course. rick perlstein, thanks for joining us. >> thanks, chenk. >> i'm going to ask our power panel is there any way in the world that rick santorum can beat president obama in the general election. >> president obama once said he wants everybody in america to go to college. what a snob. [[vo]]...we're the idea nobody wants to hear. ...until the truth
is on the new news network. >>welcome to the war room. >>jennifer granholm joins current tv. a former two-term governor. >>make your voice heard. >>detremined to find solutions. >>that partnership in order to invest in our country is critical. >>driven to find the truth. >>how did romney get his groove back? >>fearless, independent and above all,
>> we are back on the air with hour power panel. great to have you here. this is a political question, so very appropriate that you're here. the question is can rick santorum beat president obama? is it conceivable? is it? i don't know if i can conceive it. right now as a person who wants republicans to lose even though as you can tell i have incredibly mixed feelings for president obama. santorum's at 44 versus obama's 49. president obama has a significant advantage. i'm surprised it's actually that low. i think it should be much higher. katy, let me start with you. is it conceivable that santorum can beat president obama. >> i think if there's a surge in j.f.k. induced bullimia.
if that somehow came about there would be a real chance for a santorum victory. barring that, i don't see it happening. he's gotten himself into a corner, he called obama a snob because he wanted people to go to college and it turns out rick santorum has gone to college and law school, has an m.b.a., his mom went to college and is a nurse. he's the biggest snob of all. he talked about his son who he said should be in college but took a year off. even by his own standards he's the wrong candidate. >> why doesn't everybody take a year off. are we overconfident when it comes to san at your rum? >> no. it's hard to imagine the profile of the independent voter who would somehow be swayed by rick santorum's candidacy in any
state, really. i think it would be a landslide along the mcgovern proportions. >> in january, 46 among women in february, 57%. how does that make sense? >> they're masochists. >> if that's the case of a santorum you think has absolutely no chance, should you be rooting for him in the democratic primaries? >> i think you would definitely want to root for santorum to be the nominee if only because mitt romney has shown that he at least at one time in this race had some sort of way of zoosing independent voters. he doesn't have that at all now. that's gone. santorum has it not at all. it's void. there's no one who would say oh, this guy looks good. >> you're rooting for santorum. >> absolutely.
>> katey? definitely. i would have been happier with newt gingrich honestly because of comedy and i think he was totally unelectable. i'll take santorum over romney. they're terrible in different ways. romney sounds like he has no convictions whatsoever and nobody beliefs him. santorum has diarrhea of the mouth. he just won't stop talking and he says these extreme things. >> right. >> we got to leave it right there, guys. thank you so much. i don't want to be over confident. it's against my nature to be over confident, but santorum looks so beatable. when we come back, remember we had the brave woman on here, sandra fluke talking about why we need contraception at places
like georgetown. rush limbaugh said that she was a slut and he added later that. >> evidently the knowledge of how this will affect women is really powerful and really terrifying. it's super tuesday with live coverage and analysis from keith olberman. >>that's what we're here for. a special edition. countdown, super tuesday, with keith olberman. only on current tv.
voted for it, an amendment to a bill that said any employer can decide for their own moral reasons, whatever those happen to be to deny any health care to any employee for any so-called moral reason. it is incredibly broad. it allows the employers to be the moral judges of all their employees. it's unbelievable, and none the less, like i said, almost all the republicans voted in favor of it. now, this of course got started by the contraception issue whether it should be churches and their schools and hospitals should be exempt from having to pay for contraception as part of insurance coverage. the democrats wanted to bring one witness as they were doing testimony on this issue but the republicans said no. they had 10 male witnesses. the one woman was san drew fluke that the minority wanted to bring on. we brought her on to this show to tell us what she would ever said. >> i was really there to give
voice to the voices of the women who have been affected by the lack of contraceptive coverage and to talk what has happened to them, so there's several women i wanted to talk about. one is a friend of mine, who she needed contraception to prevent cysts from growing and she wasn't able to get it and actually lost an ovary. >> she eventually was able to testify at least in front of the democrats. so, now that seems like a moving story. how is rush limbaugh going to see that? very, very differently. >> what does it say about the college co ed susan fluke who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? what does that make her? it makes her a slut, right? makes her a prostitute.
she wants to be paid to have sex. she's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception she wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. >> yeah, listen, you drug addled fool, it's not susan fluke it's sandra. she's not saying i need you to pay for me as a taxpayer. she just wants insure coverage like we all have. rush limbaugh, if he ever gets treatment, he wants us to pay for it. we all pay into insurance and get something back for that. are you kidding me? you're calling people a slut. rush limbaugh was caught coming back from the dominican republican with 29 100-milligram pills of viagra. what did you need all that for? wait a minute, you weren't even married at the time. what kind of slut are you? who were you having sex with? if you're going to get into
other people's sex lives let's find out. the last thing people won't to do is get into your goddamned sex life. who are you sleeping with? hookers? you got it in your head. who are you sleeping with? i want to know. actually, i don't want to know you brought it up, and now unform we have to think about these things. when it can't get any uglier, listen to what he said. >> ms. fluke and the rest of you, here's the deal, if we are going to pay for your contraceptives and pay for you to have sex, we want something for it and i'll tell you what it is. we want you to post the videos on line so we can all watch. >> oh, you sick pervert. i mean, look at this guy's head! what filth. i want to watch oh, yeah, that would be great. she's a regular person talking